Tag: oppression

Expect fewer and less violent protests should Trump win

Nazi brown shirts destroying Jewish businesses on Kristallnacht
No more American Kristallnachts

Based on recent events, I am willing to predict that we shall see much less violence than expected in the days after the election should Donald Trump win. And if those protests occur, they will mostly be concentrated in Democratic Party strongholds where the protesters feel reasonably confident they can get away with it.

I base this optimistic prediction on the trends we have been seeing. As I first noted in April 2024, the strength of these leftist protests has clearly lost steam in the last four years. While in 2020 the protests and looting and violence occurred almost everywhere, destroying many inner cities, in the last year those protests have mostly been confined to college campuses, and have resulted in relatively little damage in comparison.

The reasons have been two fold. First, the authorities, while still generally treating these protesters too gently, have still responded more aggressively. Violent protesters are now arrested. Some face prison terms. Faced with real consequences, this violent leftist protest movement can no longer get the same numbers to turn out.

Second, the protests and violence has declined because of the utter failure of these protests to work. If anything, the looting and destruction has convinced vast numbers of Americans to oppose the left and to now vote with even greater energy against the politicians who support it.

Thought trends have been obvious for months, recently we have had even more evidence that the protests and violence will be less should Trump win. And that evidence is striking.
» Read more

19 comments

Astronomers call for the FCC to halt all launches of satellite constellations

In a letter [pdf] sent to the FCC on October 24, more than one hundred astronomers demanded a complete halt of all launches of low-Earth satellite constellations until a complete environmental review can be done.

The environmental harms of launching and burning up so many satellites aren’t clear. That’s because the federal government hasn’t conducted an environmental review to understand the impacts. What we do know is that more satellites and more launches lead to more damaging gasses and metals in our atmosphere. We shouldn’t rush forward with launching satellites at this scale without making sure the benefits justify the potential consequences of these new mega-constellations being launched, and then re-entering our atmosphere to burn up and or create debris This is a new frontier, and we should save ourselves a lot of trouble by making sure we move forward in a way that doesn’t cause major problems for our future.

Under this premise, Americans would forever be forbidden from doing anything without first having detailed environmental reviews by federal government agencies. Ponder that thought for a bit.

The astronomers’ argument of course is intellectually dishonest and disingenuous, on multiple levels. It is more than evident that these launches and satellites will cause little serious harm to the atmosphere or the environment. What the astronomers really want is to block these constellations so that their ground-based telescopes will be able to continue to see the heavens unhindered.

To hell with everyone else! We need to gaze at the stars and we are more important!

What these Chicken Littles should really do is give up on ground-based astronomy entirely, and start building space-based telescopes of all kinds, and fast. They would not only bypass the satellite constellations, they would get far better data as they would also bypass the atmosphere to get sharp images of everything they look at.

Whether the FCC listens to this absurd demand depends entirely on who wins the election. A Harris administration might easily go along, shutting down not only SpaceX’s Starlink constellation (thus getting political revenge on Elon Musk for daring to campaign against Democrats) but Amazon’s Kuiper constellation as well. Such an action would likely exceed the FCC’s statutory authority, but that won’t matter to these power-hungry thugs.

Trump in turn would almost certainly shut down much of the administrative state’s mission creep into areas of regulation it has no legal business.

17 comments

Farewell to America

The Liberty Bell
“Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all
the inhabitants thereof.” Photo credit: William Zhang

Despite my headline, this essay is not intended to be entirely pessimistic. Instead it is my effort to accept a reality that I think few people, including myself, have generally been able to process: The country we shall see after tomorrow’s election will not be the America as founded in 1776 and continued to prosper for the next quarter millennium.

The country can certainly be made great again. Elon Musk’s SpaceX proves it, time after time. The talent and creativity of free Americans is truly endless, and if Donald Trump wins it is very likely that energy will be unleashed again, in ways that no one can predict.

The country can certainly become free again. There is no law that prevents the elimination of bureaucracy and regulation, no matter how immortal government agencies appear to be. The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 proves this. Though Russia has sadly retreated back to its top-down government-ruling ways, the country did wipe out almost all its bureaucracy in 1991, resulting in an exuberant restart that even today is nowhere near as oppressive as Soviet rule.

Should Donald Trump win, we should have every expectation that he will do the largest house-cleaning of the federal government ever. The benefits will be immeasurable, and magnificent.

What however will not change, even if Donald Trump wins resoundingly tomorrow, is the modern culture and political ethics that now exist. That modern culture is fundamentally different than the America that existed during the country’ s first 200 years, and it guarantees that America can never be the country it once was.
» Read more

23 comments

Australia issues licenses for two spaceports

Australian commercial spaceports
Australia’s commercial spaceports. Click for original map.

The Australian government has now issued permits for two different spaceports, making possibly orbital launches at both in the near future.

First the planning minister for the province of South Australia has issued final approval allowing launches at the Southern Launch facility on Australia’s southern coast, though that approval included serious restrictions, such as no rocket launched could be taller than 30 meters. He also placed limitations on the number of launches per year, 36, the amount of noise a launch could make, and added other rules “regarding cultural heritage and native vegetation management.”

The spaceport hopes to complete its first orbital launch by the end of next year. Not surprisingly, the leftists in Green Party opposed the spaceport.

Second, the Australian Space Agency issued a launch license to Gilmour Space at its Bowen spaceport on the eastern coast of Australia, seven months late. This quote from the company’s founder is instructive:

But Mr Gilmour said when he and his brother, James Gilmour, set out to be the first to build a rocket of its kind in Australia almost a decade ago, he never imagined that getting a [launch] permit would be the most difficult part. “In my wildest dreams, I didn’t think it’d take this long,” he said. “I honestly thought the environmental approval [to launch a rocket over the Great Barrier Reef] would take the longest, and we got that well over a year ago.”

The company had originally hoped to launch early this year. It still hopes to do so before the end of 2024.

2 comments

Boeing finally shuts down its DEI division

Boeing's racist hiring goals in 2024
Boeing’s racist hiring goals in 2024

According to a report from Bloomberg news today, Boeing has now dismantled its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) division, with its head leaving the company.

Staff from Boeing’s DEI office will be combined with another human resources team focused on talent and employee experience, according to people familiar with the matter. Sara Liang Bowen, a Boeing vice president who led the now-defunct department, left the company on Thursday. [emphasis mine]

The highlighted phrase above tells us all we need to know. The focus under Boeing’s new CEO Kelly Ortberg will be “talent and employee experience,” not skin color or gender.

Bowen wrote the following in announcing her dismissal:

It has been the privilege of my lifetime to lead Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion at the Boeing company these past 5+ years. Our team strived every day to support the evolving brilliance and creativity of our workforce. The team achieved so much – sometimes imperfectly, never easily – and dreamed of doing much more still. [emphasis mine]

As far as I can tell, all that Bowen accomplished was to destroy the reputation of Boeing as a quality manufacturer of aerospace products. Instead, it became a place which hired people based on their race, and didn’t care if they knew the difference between a screwdriver and a forklift. The screen capture to the right comes from the company’s 2024 Boeing Sustainability & Social Impact Report [pdf], which is still online, as is the webpage of Boeing’s DEI division. Both still tout the racist quota goals of this DEI department that forced the company to consider race and gender above talent and experience in its hiring. Hopefully that ugliness will vanish soon as well.

Meanwhile, Boeing union employees on the west coast are about to vote on a third contract proposal, having rejected the previous two and going on strike since mid-September. I suspect the decision above to get rid of this poisonous DEI department will sit well with those union employees, and likely help to encourage them to approve the plan.

14 comments

Has there been a wave of fraudulent election ballots swamping PA? Let’s find out!

What does the newly discovered election fraud in PA tell us?
What does the newly discovered election
fraud in PA tell us?

In the past week there have been a bunch of stories in the conservative press from three different counties in Pennsylvania, suggesting that each county has been swamped with thousands of fraudulent ballots, produced in bulk and then delivered in large numbers so as to make it difficult to trace or investigate them.

I decided to take a closer look, because this story could either be telling us how corrupt the upcoming election will be, or it might actually be telling us that it is going to be much more reliable than we have anticipated.

The three counties involved are Lancaster, York, and Monroe. All told, less than six thousand voter registration applications, all submitted apparently in bulk by a Arizona-based company called Field+Media Corps, were under review, the number from each county being 2,500, 3,087, and 30 respectively. Note that these do not appear to be actual ballots, but registration forms that would once approved would allow the individual to vote, either by mail or in person.

Of these applications, the reviews have already produced results. For example, York County has found that of the 3,087 submitted, 47% were verified and approved, 29% needed more information, and 24% were declined and are under further review. In Monroe County the investigation has apparently only flagged these 30 forms, with one coming from a deceased person and others flagged for different reasons that in the end might be legitimate.

In Lancaster County officials have not yet issued a report. Initially it announced:
» Read more

14 comments

Nearly four dozen anti-SpaceX activists organize to flood public meeting

At a public meeting of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) on October 17, 2024 nearly four dozen anti-SpaceX activists apparently arrived en masse in order to overwhelm the public comment period with negative opinions about the company and its operation at Boca Chica.

The report at the link, from the San Antonio Express-News, is (as usual for a propaganda press outlet) decidedly in favor of these activists, and makes it sound as if these forty-plus individuals, apparently led by the activist group SaveRGV that has mounted most of the legal challenges to SpaceX, represent the opinions of the public at large.

What really happened here is that the Brownsville public has better things to do, like building businesses and making money, much of which now only exists because of SpaceX and that operation at Boca Chica. Thus, the only ones with time or desire to organize to show up at these kinds of meetings are these kinds of activists.

It might pay however for some of the more business-oriented organizations in Brownsville to make sure they are in the game at the next public meeting, scheduled for November 14, 2024 [pdf]. This would not be hard to do, and it would certainly help balance the scales, which at present are decidedly been warped by this small minority of protesters.

3 comments

Sutherland finally gets the okay from local council

Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea
Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea.

After multiple submissions of its plan to build a spaceport off the coast of Scotland, the Sutherland spaceport’s most recent proposal has finally been approved by the local council.

Most significant about the decision is that it rejected the legal objections of billionaire landowner Anders Holch Povlsen, who has previously fought the spaceport and is also an investor in the competing spaceport SaxaVord in the Shetland Islands. Povlsen had objected to the spaceport placing small tracking antennas on a nearby mountain where other larger communications antennas already operated.

This decison could still face the veto of the Scottish ministry. It will be no surprise if Povlsen uses his clout to cause difficulties at this level.

Meanwhile, it is more than two and a half years since Sutherland’s prime launch customer, Orbex, submitted its launch license to the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), with no approval. At the moment the company hopes to launch next year.

One comment

Pushback: Workers fired from San Fran’s subway for refusing jab win $1 million jury award

Are Americans finally waking up and emulating their country's founders?

Fight! Fight! Fight! Six workers who were fired from San Francisco’s
BART subway system for refusing to get a COVID jab have won a $7.8 million judgment from a jury, with each person taking home more than a million dollars in damages.

The employees claimed religious exemptions to the vaccine mandate but say they were not accommodated by the transit agency, and subsequently lost their job.

BART did initially grant vaccine exemptions, but the plaintiffs argued they weren’t accommodated. An accommodation could have meant that they were able to work from home or get tested regularly for COVID. They argued none of that happened and they lost their jobs.

More information here and here. There were not the only fired employees who sued. Another sixteen had sued and then settled in July. It also appears that further suits by fired employees are pending.

Do not expect these stories to stop. Over the next five years we will see story after story of blacklisted individuals winning case after case, because almost all the blacklisting in the past five years due to politics, COVID, and racial bigotry has been blatantly illegal, not only breaking numerous civil rights laws but in direct violation of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the very fundamental principles of American culture. When these cases get before juries, the plantiffs are going to win, and win big, as these former BART employees have.

8 comments

As if on cue, the Democrats now go after Musk for daring to campaign for Trump

Elon Musk under attack
The target is now Elon Musk

When Elon Musk revealed in May 2022 that he had decided to switch his political allegiance from the Democratic to the Republican Party, he immediately predicted quite correctly the following: “Watch their dirty tricks campaign against me unfold.”

As I noted in detail a year ago, the federal campaign against Musk and his companies since then has been extensive and disgusting, with investigations opened by the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Transportation Department.

Nor has this harassment eased in the past year. If anything it has accelerated, with the red tape by the FAA slowing down operations at SpaceX to the point of absurdity.

Now, as the campaign season moves to its climax on election day and the polls increasingly show a major shift in the direction of a Trump win, barring any illegal vote tampering, we should not be surprised that the Democrats are now demanding that Elon Musk shut up, and are doing so by issuing new false accusations against him.

Leading the way was a Wall Street Journal report [behind a pay wall], picked up by all the usual suspects in the propaganda press, based solely on anonymous sources, that accused Musk of having private and secret phone conversations with Vladimir Putin, head of Russia. From this typical propaganda piece at NPR:
» Read more

24 comments

Sutherland spaceport submits another revised plan to local council

Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea
Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea.

We’re from the government and we are here to help you! The long-delayed proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland has now submitted another revised plan to its local Highlands council for approval.

The amended plans for Sutherland Spaceport include a smaller launch pad and launch services facility, and realigning an access road to avoid an area of deep peat. Highland Council planners said the changes would mean reducing the amount of peat that would have to be excavated by more than half. The soil is seen as important because it absorbs CO2.

Highland councillors meeting next week have been asked to approve the amendments. In a report, officials said the amount of peat to be dug up could be cut from 24,046 cubic metres to 9,895 cubic metres.

This is the second time the spaceport has had to submit revised plans to this council. It did so in December 2023, but apparently the council was not satisfied.

Meanwhile Sutherland’s main launch customer, Orbex, has still not gotten its launch licence from the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority, first applied for in February 2022. Orbex, which has a fifty year lease at Sutherland and has built its rocket factory nearby, had planned to do its first test launch of its Prime rocket two years ago. Didn’t happen.

Adding to these bureaucratic delays, Anders Holch Povlsen, a local billionaire — who is an investor in the Saxaford spaceport on the Shetland Islands — in July 2024 filed what appeared to be an absurd harrasment lawsuit against Sutherland, and this was the second time he had done so.

I think Orbex picked the wrong spaceport horse in this race, and is likely going to be killed by this red tape and opposition.

One comment

But will loyal Democrats actually abandon their beloved party? History says no

The Democratic Party: Given decades of blind loyalty by its supporters
The Democratic Party: Decades of blind loyalty
by its supporters

This week the publication Issues and Insights had a poll taken of registered Democrats to garner some idea of their overall opinion of the Democratic Party’s sudden back-room deal to dump Joe Biden as presidential candidate and replace him with Kamala Harris. The poll asked whether those polled agreed or disagreed with these three statements:

  • The process the Democratic Party used to select its nominee for President did not yield the strongest candidate.
  • The process the Democratic Party used to select Kamala Harris as its nominee was undemocratic.
  • I lost significant faith in the Democratic Party because it did not disclose Biden’s health issues during the primary process.

For Democratic Party politicians, the results should be disheartening at best. A significant majority of the 1,240 registered Democrats polled agreed with all three statements, with 58% agreeing strongly or somewhat with the first statement, 52% agreeing strongly or somewhat with the second statement, and 54% agreeing strongly or somewhat with the third statement. As noted by Scott Pinsker of PJMedia in analyzing the results:
» Read more

16 comments

SpaceX rolls out the next Superheavy for sixth test orbital launch

SpaceX in a tweet on October 22, 2024 announced the roll out to the launch tower of the next Superheavy to be used in the sixth orbital test flight, only nine days after that launch tower had successfully caught a Superheavy at the end of the fifth orbital test flight.

Though no launch date has been announced, the company is clearly wants to do it soon. Though its present launch license allows it go when ready, it remains unclear whether it will get that approval from the FAA when requested. FAA upper management has repeatedly indicated a desire to delay its approvals to SpaceX, and until there is a change in the White House — thus forcing a change in that FAA upper management — there is no reason to expect the agency to change its behavior.

12 comments

Cyprus signs Artemis Accords

Cyprus today officially became the 46th nation to sign the Artemis Accords, its signing coming one day before the already announced planned signing by Chile tomorrow.

Adding both nations to the list, the American-led Artemis Accords alliance now includes the following 47 nations: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

Should Donald Trump return to the White House it will be very interesting to watch how this alliance evolves in the coming years. The original goal for the accords when started by the Trump administration was to build an alliance with enough clout to overcome the limitations on private property contained by the Outer Space Treaty. Though this alliance is surely now large enough to force those changes, that goal has been mostly pushed aside by the Biden administration. I suspect a new Trump administration will be able to bring it back to life, with added force due to this alliance’s size.

One comment

Have Americans finally awakened? Early voting suggests yes

Rick, stating the truth in Casablanca
Have ordinary Americans finally awakened to the
anti-American plans of the Democratic Party?

For the past few weeks early voting data from a variety of states has begun to suggest a major shift in what have been the traditional voting patterns for decades. In the past, Democrats routinely dominating early mail-in voting, while Republicans instead went to the polls on election day.

This election season is seeing an almost Earth-shattering change.

Nor are these three states outliers. A look at a nationwide map of early voting shows that Republicans also lead in Georgia and Arizona. Though the overall numbers nationwide show a Democrat-Republican split of 46% to 36%, the number of early votes from Republicans this election is far higher than in the past.

Though caution must be exercised, and we must recognize that these numbers do not guarantee a win for Donald Trump, what the data suggests however is an amazing newfound voting enthusiasm among Republicans. » Read more

20 comments

SpaceX asks FCC for license revision for launching nearly 30,000 Starlink satellites

SpaceX on October 11, 2024 submitted a request to the FCC to revise its Starlink satellite license to cover a revised plan for its second generation satellites that includes a request to place 29,988 Starlink satellites in orbit.

SpaceX first requests several amendments to the orbital parameters of its Gen2 system between 340 km and 365km altitude to keep pace with rapidly evolving global demand for high-quality broadband. First,SpaceX amends the inclination of its orbital shell at a nominal altitude of 345 km from 46 degrees to 48 degrees. SpaceX also amends its pending Gen2 application to seek authority to operate satellites in its Gen2 system in two additional orbital shells — at 355 km altitude in a 43-degree inclination and at 365 km altitude in a 28- or 32-degree inclination. The total number of operational satellites will remain 29,988 satellites across the amended Gen2 system.

With the exception of its polar shell at 360 km, which will remain unchanged, SpaceX also amends its application to more flexibly distribute satellites in its shells between 340 km and 365 km than requested in its pending application, specifically, in up to 72 planes per shell and up to 144 satellites per plane. While this reconfiguration will result in two additional shells and a higher maximum number of orbital planes and satellites per plane for all but one shell between 340 km and 365 km, the total number of operational satellites in the Gen2 system will remain 29,988 satellites.

In the company’s previous request for this number of satellites, the FCC had approved only 7,500, the full request still pending. We can expect objections from the other big satellite constellations to this request. The FCC’s response remains unclear. There could be legitimate reasons to limit SpaceX request, but it is also possible politics will enter the decision as well, for illegitimate reasons.

Meanwhile, astronomers are already whining about the problems these Starlink satellites will cause to their ground-based telescopes. It seems these so-called brilliant scientists can’t get it through their heads that astronomy from Earth will become increasingly difficult in the coming years — with hundreds of thousands of satellites planned from many satellite constellations, not just SpaceX — while astronomy from space has always been a better choice anyway. Rather than demand regulation or restrictions on these new satellite constellations, they should be pushing hard to developing new orbiting telescopes, now, for launch as quickly as possible.

8 comments

Chile to sign Artemis Accords

NASA yesterday invited the media to attend to signing of the Artemis Accords by Chile at the end of this week.

Chile will be the 46th nation to sign. The full list is as follows: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

Though the Biden administration continues to describe the accords as a means for “reinforcing” the Outer Space Treaty — the opposite of its original intent — a new Trump administration will be well positioned with this very large alliance to force changes in the treaty’s limits to private property and capitalism. All that has to happen is a will to demand it. Some of these nations might balk, but I think most will go along, some quite enthusiastically.

2 comments

Donations and applications to Harvard drop significantly

Harvard: where you get can get a shoddy education centered on hate and bigotry
Harvard: where you can spend a lot of money
and still get a shoddy education

According to Harvard, donations to the university in 2024 dropped more than $151 million from donations the previous year, with other indications that overall donors and students are fleeing the university due to its anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas, racist DEI, pro-plagiarism, and anti-free speech policies.

Total donations were down by $151 million, or 14%, in fiscal 2024 from the prior year. Within that total, donations to Harvard’s endowment fell by nearly $193 million from a year ago, while donations for current use gifts increased by $42 million in that time frame.

The drop in donations won’t leave Harvard bankrupt, as it still has more than $53 billion in its endowment, giving it a strong foundation for survival, in the near term, if donations dry up entirely.

And they might.

Bill Ackman, a billionaire Harvard alum, said in December that Gay’s “failures have led to billions of dollars of canceled, paused and withdrawn donations to the university. … I am personally aware of more than a billion dollars of terminated donations from a small group of Harvard’s most generous Jewish and non-Jewish alumni,” Ackman said.

More significant however was the 17% decline in student applications as of December 2023. Though the numbers still exceeded application numbers from before the COVID epidemic, the drop now suggests students have reviewed the reality of this college versus its fantasy, and are now beginning to reject it.

Eventually Harvard will have to fix its bankrupt DEI policies as well as diversify its faculity so that not every teacher and staff member is a pro-Hamas anti-Semite who considers America the devil incarnate and all western civilization nothing more than an expression of “white supremacy.” (I know I am exaggerating but I also know sadly not by much.) If it doesn’t it will certainly fade from view, as students find more viable colleges, knowing that a degree from this bankrupt university will no longer get them the high level jobs they want.

6 comments

Good news: The European Union’s space law is delayed

According to comments by one official of the European Union (EU) at a conference in Italy this week, its proposed space law has been delayed and will not be ready for publication in 2024, as previously promised.

It appears the delay is mostly because of what appear to be complex objections to this law from many of the EU’s many member nations.

Ten of the European Union’s 27 member states “have a full-fledged national space law addressing private-sector operation,” Von der Dunk said. The national laws cover authorization and supervision of commercial activities under Article VI of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.

The EU’s authority to promote scientific progress and the industrial competitiveness of member states comes from the 2007 Lisbon Treaty. That authority is limited, though. “The commission has to make an argument why [space law] should be treated at the EU level, as opposed to the national level,” Von der Dunk said. [emphasis mine]

As I noted in April 2024 when the release of the EU’s space law was pushed back until the summer of 2024 (which by the way did not happen), those member nations do not wish to give the EU that authority, as the EU’s track record in these kinds of matters is heavy regulation and a lot or red tape, all designed to give it power and squelch private enterprise.

It appears those member nations are acting to block this law, and appear to be succeeding. My guess is that Germany, France, Spain, and Italy are the main opponents, all of which have their own space laws in place and are now developing viable private commercial rocket and spacecraft companies. They don’t want the EU’s busy hands anywhere close to these businesses, because they expect it to squash them if it gets the chance.

One comment

Commerce loosens regulations, allowing American space companies easier use of international facilities

The Commerce department today announced that it has issued three new rulings that will ease the regulations and licensing procedures that American rocket and satellite companies have to go through in order to launch from international facilities.

The first rule will ease licensing for launches from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. This will make it easier for American rocket companies to launch from the new spaceports being built in these nations, as well as allow satellite and orbital tug companies to launch their spacecraft from these nations using non-American rockets.

The second rule, still in its interim stage of approval, would ease the export licensing for satellites and spacecraft “to over 40 allies and partners worldwide, reducing licensing requirements for the least sensitive components for most destinations, and broadening license exceptions to support additional National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) cooperative programs.” It appears this ruling focuses specifically on the countries who have signed the Artemis Accords, joining NASA’s Artemis program.

The third rule, which is at present only proposed, will remove from the State Department’s strict ITAR regulations many space-related defense technology, transfering their licensing to the much more relaxed Commerce department. This ruling appears aimed at helping the new burgeoning orbital tug, refueling, and satellite servicing industry, which uses rendezvous and proximity technology that was previously considered military in nature.

While it appears this easing of regulation goes against the Biden administration general policy of tightening regulations, the changes make sense if we recognize that these regulations also loosen access to American technology for many international partners, something this administration favors.

All in all, however, the changes are thoughtfully worked out, and will likely help energize the American space industry without releasing important technology to the wrong nations.

6 comments

Sinwar’s elimination is merely one small win in Israel’s new quest for total victory

Hamas vs Israel
The obvious reasons why killing the leaders
of Hamas and Hezbollah is a good thing.
Courtesy of Doug Ross.

The confirmation today that Israel had finally killed Hamas leader Yahha Sinwar, considered the main architect behind the October 7, 2023 murder, rape, and torture of more than a thousand Israeli men, women, children, and babies near Gaza is good news, but it only is one small victory in what is now clearly Israel’s decision to go for nothing less than total victory against the terrorists who have been hounding and killiing its citizens wantonly for decades.

You see, since the 1973 Yom Kippur war, all of Israel’s responses against terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah have been limited and targeted, and ended quickly with fake ceasefires that allowed those terrorist groups to not only regroup, but actually expand their capabilities.

The most blatent and best example of this what happened in connection with Israel’s 2006 month-long invasion of Lebanon, launched in an attempt to defeat Hezbollah. The invasion bogged down, and as a result Israel and Hezbollah ended up agreeing to UN resolution 1701, which had Israel evaculate southern Lebanon and the UN take on the task of keeping the peace. The agreement also created a demilitarized zone in southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah was forbidden.

That agreement was an utter failure. Neither the UN nor Lebanon had the ability or even the desire to limit Hezbollah, and so before long it had made that demilitarized zone a launchpad for rocket attacks into Israel. In Israel’s most recent campaign to clear out that zone, it has also discovered tunnels and large weapons caches clearly designed for Hezbollah’s own planned October 7th-type invasion.

After October 7th, what I labeled Israel’s Pearl Harbor, Israel was clearly no longer going to accept this failed piecemeal and limited negotiating approach, administered by dishonest third parties like the UN and even the United States. Instead, it decided to go by an old American concept of “unconditional surrender,” first made plain by Grant during the Civil War and then underlined by Eisenhower and Roosevelt in their insistence on “total victory” in World War II.

In other words, Israel would only accept a ceasefire or peace treaty if it involved the surrender and capture of the leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah. If they refused to do this, then Israel resolved to kill them.

It has now demonstrated its ability to do so, with gratifying success.

Israel’s military actions since October 7th however also illustrate a major change in strategy and tactics. » Read more

14 comments

Musk: We will attempt to catch Starship like Superheavy, “hopefully early next year”

According to a tweet by Elon Musk on October 15, 2024, SpaceX is targeting early 2025 for the first attempt to recover Starship after launch, and to do it the same way it recovered Superheavy, by catching it with a set of launch tower chopsticks.

To do this will require getting that second launch tower at Boca Chica operational. It will also require SpaceX to successfully restart Starship’s Raptor engines in space, something it has not yet done. Once this is demonstrated to work, the company would also have to do another orbital test where Starship is put in a full orbit and then de-orbited precisely to a point over the ocean, demonstrating that such a return can next be done reliably over land.

In other words, a tower catch can only happen after at least two more test flights. Thus, to do it early next year means SpaceX will have to establish a test launch pace of a launch every one or two months. This is actually something Musk has said repeatedly he wants to do, but has been stymied repeatedly by FAA red tape from doing it.

I suspect Musk’s tweet is expressing his unstated hope that a Trump victory in November will force the FAA to ease its bureaucratic interference.

9 comments

SpaceX sues California Coastal Commission

Wants to be a dictator
Wants to be a dictator

As promised by Elon Musk, SpaceX has now filed suit against California Coastal Commission, and its commissioners, accusing it of violating Musk’s first amendment rights and using its regulatory power against the company simply because those commissioners disagree with Musk’s political positions.

You can read SpaceX’s lawsuit filing here [pdf]. From its introduction:

[The Commission has engaged in naked political discrimination against Plaintiff Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) in violation of the rights of free speech and due process enshrined in the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Rarely has a government agency made so clear that it was exceeding its authorized mandate to punish a company for the political views and statements of its largest shareholder and CEO. Second, the Commission is trying to unlawfully regulate space launch programs—which are critical to national security and other national policy objectives—at Vandenberg Space Force Base (the Base), a federal enclave and the world’s second busiest spaceport.

The lawsuit stems from the comments made by the commissioners when then voted against the military’s plan to allow SpaceX to increase its launch rate at Vandenberg spaceport to up to 50 launches per year. In those comments, the commissioners made it clear that the main reason they were voting against the motion was because they were offended by Elon Musk and his political positions, not because the company was doing anything wrong. In fact, the commissioners knew SpaceX was doing nothing wrong. As noted at the first link above:
» Read more

5 comments

The evidence strongly suggests FAA top management is working to sabotage SpaceX

FAA administrator Mike Whitaker today said this to SpaceX:
FAA administrator Mike Whitaker to SpaceX:
“Nice company you have there. Shame if something
happened to it.”

After SpaceX’s incredibly successful fifth test flight of Starship/Superheavy on October 13, 2024, I began to wonder about the complex bureaucratic history leading up to that flight. I was most puzzled by the repeated claims by FAA officials that it would issue no launch license before late November, yet ended up approving a license in mid-October in direct conflict with these claims. In that context I was also puzzled by the FAA’s own written approval of that launch, which in toto seemed to be a complete vindication of all of SpaceX’s actions while indirectly appearing to be a condemnation of the agency’s own upper management.

What caused the change at the FAA? Why was it claiming no approval until late November when it was clear by early October that SpaceX was preparing for a mid-October launch? And why claim late November when the FAA’s own bureaucracy has now made it clear in approving the launch that a mid-October date was always possible, and nothing SpaceX did prevented that.

I admit my biases: My immediate speculation is always to assume bad behavior by government officials. But was that speculation correct? Could it also be that SpaceX had not done its due diligence properly, causing the delays, as claimed by the FAA?

While doing my first review of the FAA’s written reevaluation [pdf] that approved the October 13th launch, I realized that a much closer review of the history and timeline of events might clarify these questions.

So, below is that timeline, as best as I can put together from the public record. The lesser known acronyms stand for the following:

TCEQ: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
NMFS: National Marine Fisheries Service (part of NOAA)
FWS: Fish & Wildlife Service (part of the Department of Interior)

My inserted comments periodically tell the story and provide some context.
» Read more

17 comments

Army successfully completes one-year commercial satellite pilot program

Capitalism in space: The U.S. Army has now successfully completed a one-year pilot program whereby it purchased the use of commercial communications satellites from both Intelsat and SES, rather than attempt to build and launch its own satellites.

Under the pilot, the Army selected satellite operators Intelsat and SES to provide “satcom as a managed service,” a model where the provider handles all satellite communications functions — from setup and maintenance of equipment to network management and technical support — through a subscription-based contract.

The project, officially completed on Sept. 30, is now raising questions about whether the Department of Defense will expand its reliance on commercial satcom providers for long-term military communications needs. David Broadbent, president of Intelsat’s Government Solutions, said that while the pilot program demonstrated the efficiency of managed services, it is still uncertain if the Army will fully embrace this model for future satellite communications (satcom) procurement.

It appears that the Pentagon’s bureaucracy is uncomfortable with the idea, and is resisting expanding the program beyond this one test. For decades the military has designed, built, owned, and operated its own satellites. That approach has created a very large job-base within the military that feels threatened by the idea of out-sourcing this work to the private sector. That approach however has also in the last two decades done a poor job of providing the Pentagon the communications satellites it needs on time and on budget.

Whether the Pentagon will change to this new approach, as NASA mostly has, will likely hinge on who wins the election in November. A Harris administration will likely provide little guidance one way or the other, but will also likely take the side of the bureaucrats in power now. A Trump administration is much more likely to force a change.

3 comments

Even as the left ramps up its effort to cancel Columbus, new DNA data suggests he was born of Jewish parents

What Philadelphia thinks of Columbus
How Democrats in Philadelphia celebrated
Christopher Columbus in 2022, placing
a box over his statue so no one could see it.

Now we know why the anti-Semitic left has been striving for years to cancel Columbus: New DNA analysis of the remains of Christopher Columbus now strongly suggests his ancestry was Jewish and that he might even have come originally from Spain, not Italy as has been long claimed.

“We have DNA from Christopher Columbus, very partial, but sufficient. We have DNA from Hernando Colón, his son,” [said forensic expert Miguel Lorente]. “And both in the Y chromosome (male) and in the mitochondrial DNA (transmitted by the mother) of Hernando there are traits compatible with Jewish origin.”

Around 300,000 Jews lived in Spain before the ‘Reyes Catolicos’, Catholic monarchs Isabella and Ferdinand, ordered Jews and Muslims to convert to the Catholic faith or leave the country. Many settled around the world. The word Sephardic comes from Sefarad, or Spain in Hebrew.

After analysing 25 possible places, Lorente said it was only possible to say Columbus was born in Western Europe.

Though these results do involve a lot of uncertainties, they are very intriguing and indeed quite possible. If Columbus was born Jewish he would have had to convert in order to have any chance of obtaining work in Catholic Spain. He would have also done everything he could to keep secret his Jewish ancestry.

As this is Columbus Day, which for almost a century has been an American holiday to celebrate this greatest of explorers who changed human history, it is not surprising that this news was released just last week. It is also not surprising that the campaign to cancel Columbus continues.
» Read more

8 comments

Uzbekistan signs Outer Space Treaty

More than a half century after the Outer Space Treaty was written and put into force in 1967, Uzbekistan’s legislature in August approved joining the treaty, with the nation’s president signing that legislation this week.

By joining this treaty, Uzbekistan aims to strengthen cooperative relations with developed nations, accelerate the transfer of space-related technologies, and ensure that its space activities are conducted in accordance with international law and its national interests.

By signing the law the country — formerly part of the Soviet Union — is better positioned to sign joint agreements with other nations, either with China’s lunar base partnership or the American Artemis Accords (as presently being structured by the Biden administration).

One comment

Estonia signs Artemis Accords

NASA yesterday announced that Estonia had become the 45th nation to sign the Artemis Accords, the bi-lateral treaty created during the Trump administration initially to overcome the Outer Space Treaty’s limits on private property and ownership.

The Biden administration appears to be working to de-emphasize those goals, and in fact to instead strengthen the Outer Space Treaty. From this press release (and similar to statements in all recent press releases):

The accords are grounded in the Outer Space Treaty and other agreements including the Registration Convention, the Rescue and Return Agreement, as well as best practices and norms of responsible behavior that NASA and its partners have supported, including the public release of scientific data.

The full list of nations is as follows: Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, the Ukraine, the United States and Uruguay.

It is interesting to note that Estonia as well as Lithuania, Armenia, and the Ukraine were once part of the Soviet Union (against their will). Similarly, the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia were once part of the Soviet bloc, also against their will. It appears they want to ally themselves with the west, with one reason their fear that Russia might invade them as it has the Ukraine. It also could be that these nations agree with the Trump administration’s original goals, and wish to promote capitalism and private property, having experienced for decades the failures of communist and authoritarian rule.

The future goals of the Artemis Accord alliance will demand entirely on who wins the presidency in the elction in November.

Leave a comment

Musk says SpaceX will sue California Coastal Commission

In a tweet on X on October 12, 2024, Elon Musk said that SpaceX will sue the California Coastal Commission for violating his first amendment rights as soon the court opens tomorrow.

“Filing suit against them on Monday for violating the First Amendment,” he wrote, adding: “Tuesday, since court is closed on Monday.”

At least two commissioners had made it very clear in public statements at a hearing last week that they were voting against a Space Force request that would increase the number of launches at Vandenberg because they opposed Elon Musk’s political positions, not because the request would do any harm to the coast. The commission then rejected the request 6-4, with others claiming that SpaceX should have made the request directly rather than have the Space Force do it.

The vote remains non-binding, as the Space Force has the legal power to do whatever it wants at Vandenberg, and only works with the commission as a courtesy.

2 comments

FAA approves launch license for tomorrow’s SpaceX Starship/Superheavy launch

Superheavy being captured by the tower chopsticks at landing
Artist rendering of Superheavy being captured by
the tower chopsticks at landing. Click for video.

The FAA today announced that it has finally approved a launch license for the fifth test launch tomorrow of SpaceX’s Starship/Superheavy, and that this approval applies to the next few launches as well, assuming the FAA or other government agencies or politicians don’t attempt to nitpick things again.

The full written re-evaluation [pdf] released today is somewhat hilarious, in that it spends 61 pages essentially concluding that SpaceX’s proposed actions were already approved by the 2022 Environoment Reassessment [abbreviated PEA by the FAA], spending page after page detailing why a license should be approved based on that 2022 reassessment. After wasting more than two months essentially retyping the 2022 conclusions, this report concludes ludicrously:

The 2022 PEA examined the potential for significant environmental impacts from Starship/SuperHeavy launch operations at the Boca Chica Launch Site and defined the regulatory setting for impacts associated with Starship/Super Heavy. The areas evaluated for environmental impacts in this WR [written reevaluation] included noise and noise compatible land use and biological resources.

Based on the above review and in conformity with FAA Order 1050.1F, Paragraph 9-2.c, the FAA has concluded that the modification of an existing vehicle operator license for Starship/Super Heavy operations conforms to the prior environmental documentation, that the data contained in the 2022 PEA remains substantially valid, that there are no significant environmental changes, and all pertinent conditions and requirements of the prior approval have been met or will be met in the current action. Therefore, the preparation of a supplemental or new environmental document is not necessary to support the Proposed Action.

In plain English, SpaceX is doing nothing to require this bureaucratic paperwork, but we have insisted on doing it anyway in order to justify our useless jobs while acting to squelch free Americans from getting the job done as they wish. As Musk so rightly put it last month, “It takes longer to do the government paperwork to license a rocket launch than it does to design and build the actual hardware.”

Despite this approval, we must emphasize that this action has now set a very bad precedent for the future, When SpaceX makes changes to its flight plans on future test launches — something that is guaranteed as the company incrementally improves the design — the FAA will almost certainly shut things down again as it spends months once again determining that nothing is wrong.

Either way, stand by for tomorrow’s test launch, lifting off at 7 am (Central time). I have embedded the Space Affairs youtube live stream below, since SpaceX’s live streams on X don’t allow one to stand by, and will only go live 35 minutes before launch.
» Read more

34 comments
1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 254